(PC) Taylor v. Wong et al, No. 2:2017cv01758 - Document 34 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/12/18 VACATING 32 Findings and Recommendations; GRANTING 33 Motion for Extension; and GRANTING plaintiff 45 days from the date of this order to file an opposition to 25 Motion for Summary Judgment and 26 Motion for Stay; and DIRECTING defendants to re-serve plaintiff with the summary judgment motion and motion to stay within 7 days of the date of this order. (Coll, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT TAYLOR, 12 13 14 15 No. 2: 17-cv-1758 MCE KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER WONG, et al., Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant 18 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 3, 2018, defendants filed a summary judgment motion and a 19 motion to stay. (ECF Nos. 25, 26.) Plaintiff did not file oppositions to these motions. On 20 September 20, 2018, the undersigned granted plaintiff thirty days to file an opposition to the 21 summary judgment motion. (ECF No. 29.) Plaintiff did not respond to the September 20, 2018 22 order. Accordingly, on November 6, 2018, the undersigned recommended that this action be 23 dismissed. (ECF No. 32.) 24 On December 6, 2018, plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of time to file an 25 opposition to defendants’ summary judgment motion. (ECF No. 33.) Plaintiff also requests that 26 he be provided with a copy of defendants’ summary judgment motion. In this pleading, plaintiff 27 acknowledges receipt of the September 20, 2018 order. Plaintiff alleges that he could not file a 28 timely opposition because of numerous, recent transfers, lack of access to his legal property and 1 1 his failure to receive his legal mail in a timely manner. Plaintiff’s December 6, 2018 motion for extension of time is neither dated nor signed by 2 3 plaintiff. However, the proof of service attached to the motion contains a date and plaintiff’s 4 signature. Because the proof of service is dated and signed, the undersigned will consider 5 plaintiff’s motion for extension of time. 6 Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 7 1. The November 6, 2018 findings and recommendations (ECF No. 32) are vacated; 8 2. Plaintiff’s December 6, 2018 motion for extension of time (ECF No. 33) is granted; 9 10 plaintiff is granted forty-five days from the date of this order to file an opposition to defendants’ summary judgment motion and motion to stay; 11 3. Defendants shall re-serve plaintiff with the summary judgment motion and motion to 12 stay within seven days of the date of this order; defendants shall file proof of re-service with the 13 court. 14 Dated: December 12, 2018 15 16 17 Tay1758.vac 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
